Democratic Primaries

bluewater

(5,420 posts)

15. As in Jimmy Carter was an Incumbent? and George H. W. Bush was an incumbent?

Fri Jul 26, 2019, 01:42 PM

Jul 2019

Jimmy Carter (incumbent) was leading Ronald Reagan. And lost.

And you glossed over: President George H.W. Bush (incumbent) was crushing Bill Clinton. And lost.

And when George W. Bush (incumbent) was trailing Al Gore? But won.

And you even gloss over the examples you provided:

"There are some extreme exceptions to this, like with Ronald Reagan in 1983, as the US was coming out of a pretty significant recession, and even 1991, when Bush was riding high based on the success of the Gulf War..."

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

81 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Polls are unreliable a year before an election. [View all] bluewater Jul 2019 OP

It's obvious qazplm135 Jul 2019 #1

Polls are quite reliable a year before an election. wyldwolf Jul 2019 #2

Totally wrong when it comes to Democrats Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #30

but totally true in general wyldwolf Jul 2019 #37

538 says you are wrong Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #54

538 says I'm correct wyldwolf Jul 2019 #56

Changing the subject doesn't change the fact you were wrong Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #68

I didn't change the subject wyldwolf Jul 2019 #69

Please follow your own advice and don't deflect Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #71

You've written so much to have said so little wyldwolf Jul 2019 #72

Projection and personal attacks Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #74

Again a lot of words very little substance wyldwolf Jul 2019 #75

You described your "contributions" perfectly Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #78

oh, the Pee Wee Herman gambit. Brilliant. wyldwolf Jul 2019 #79

I have tried facts to counter your personal attacks and failure to admit you were wrong Bradshaw3 Jul 2019 #80

your interjection into a conversation that doesn't involve you does not equal facts. wyldwolf Jul 2019 #81

Exactly! It's a straw man to say polls this far out don't predict election results DrToast Jul 2019 #70

This is actually an anti-intellectual piece. SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #3

The OP keeps hammering her belief polls are meaningless this far out... but... wyldwolf Jul 2019 #4

It's even more than that. The impact today is huge. SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #7

Walter Mondale always led in '83-'84? crazytown Jul 2019 #27

In the year leading up the primaries, yes wyldwolf Jul 2019 #28

Mondale did Not lead Reagan in 1984. crazytown Jul 2019 #29

I didn't say he did. wyldwolf Jul 2019 #31

Quote crazytown Jul 2019 #32

Quote wyldwolf Jul 2019 #34

You were replying to an OP about the reliability of polls for the GE crazytown Jul 2019 #35

I was more replying to the OP about her constant drumbeat about polls in general wyldwolf Jul 2019 #38

Right ... got it. crazytown Jul 2019 #40

She's my #2 wyldwolf Jul 2019 #41

Like you, Harris was my #2 crazytown Jul 2019 #42

Harris crazytown Jul 2019 #43

she's not ready for primetime... wyldwolf Jul 2019 #44

70 is the new 47 crazytown Jul 2019 #48

Almost every quoted and/or referenced source is a university professor, so nope, it is very, very Celerity Jul 2019 #10

Anti-intellectual and not sources as well as you think. SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #11

not buying it, you just do not like what the article is implying you you resort to frivolous attacks Celerity Jul 2019 #14

There is more merit in my response than in the article. SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #18

you sound scared Celerity Jul 2019 #20

Big time. I live in fear. SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #21

me too Celerity Jul 2019 #22

. SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #23

I am trying to always be nice on here, at least in the end, and I am tired of all the infighting Celerity Jul 2019 #25

Agree! The op has posted several similar pieces. They usually have this spin unless it's the Thekaspervote Jul 2019 #12

tiring and obvious +100000 nt Vegas Roller Jul 2019 #66

What is the proof that those polled are not paying attention? treestar Jul 2019 #5

That question has been asked in a number of polls and the voters say they're paying attention. highplainsdem Jul 2019 #13

Head-to-head polls against an incumbent this far out are actually pretty reliable... Drunken Irishman Jul 2019 #6

unreliable [ˌənrəˈlīəb(ə)l] ADJECTIVE not able to be relied upon. bluewater Jul 2019 #8

Do you know the definition of incumbent? Drunken Irishman Jul 2019 #9

As in Jimmy Carter was an Incumbent? and George H. W. Bush was an incumbent? bluewater Jul 2019 #15

I spoke of Bush. Didn't gloss over him at all. Drunken Irishman Jul 2019 #19

Honestly, Thank you for the discussion. bluewater Jul 2019 #24

My point stands... Drunken Irishman Jul 2019 #33

"Bush was the incumbent losing in the polls to Gore, the ultimate loser." wyldwolf Jul 2019 #39

lol nice catch! THAT needs editting! bluewater Jul 2019 #45

you said it twice. wyldwolf Jul 2019 #46

really? where is the second time? Perhaps you just misread? bluewater Jul 2019 #47

Post #15 wyldwolf Jul 2019 #49

Could you please quote what you are taking issue with in post #15 bluewater Jul 2019 #50

"And when George W. Bush (incumbent) was trailing Al Gore? But won." wyldwolf Jul 2019 #51

ok.......... so I said something different? lol bluewater Jul 2019 #52

you twice called George W. Bush the incumbent in his race with Al Gore wyldwolf Jul 2019 #53

so.... it was all really about me calling Bush an incumbent? Ok..... bluewater Jul 2019 #57

Yes. Once is a typo. Twice reveals something you obviously believed. wyldwolf Jul 2019 #58

Thanks again for bumping the thread. bluewater Jul 2019 #59

So back in 2000 when you thought Bush was the incumbent wyldwolf Jul 2019 #60

Pardon? bluewater Jul 2019 #61

This thread would not exist if... quickesst Jul 2019 #16

Yup... SidDithers Jul 2019 #17

lol Loki Liesmith Jul 2019 #26

lol R B Garr Jul 2019 #36

Recommended. And this is, in my view, a key part of the problem: guillaumeb Jul 2019 #55

The author is 100% correct. Not only are polls unreliable a year prior to an election mtnsnake Jul 2019 #62

Lol Skya Rhen Jul 2019 #63

Too bad the pollsters didn't account for Russian Active Measures.. Kahuna7 Jul 2019 #64

Translation Vegas Roller Jul 2019 #65

The polls can even be unreliable a few days before the election andym Jul 2019 #67

2016 is a bad example to use IMO. StevieM Jul 2019 #73

The more voters see if Warren, the better they like her. nt tblue37 Jul 2019 #76

In other news, water is wet. JonathanDough Jul 2019 #77